Time for a change?

[aebrown]

So I've been wanting to change around my set up for some time now and was hoping to some input. As we can see, I currently have a 40d, 24-70, and 17-40

I was thinking on keeping the 40d for a backup body since selling it seems worthless given the dramatic decrease in resale, and then selling both lenses

...then...

buy a 5d classic (cant afford mark ii), get a 24-105 and 135L (i rented it, and absolutely loved it).

My main questions are: is a 24-70 on a 5d much better than a 24-105? (i don't think i will miss the f/2.8) AND should I really keep my 40d even though is has about 25,000 actuations?

[joe mama]

The 17-40 / 4L and 24-70 / 2.8L are outstanding performers on a 5D, albeit significantly wider than they are on the 40D. My advice, if you want to go FF, is to just get the 5D and see how you like those lenses on it. When you say you rented "it", I don't know if you mean the 5D, the 24-105 IS and 135L, or all of it, so I don't know if you already tried your current lenses on the 5D or not.

As for your 40D, well, unless you're going to use it, then get rid of it after you get a 5D.

[aebrown]

oops sorry for the confusion, it was in reference to the 135L.

Yeah this is a hard one for me because i feel like unless i sell everything, i wont be able to afford everything.

More than anything, it will be hard to part with the 40d...

[joe mama]

oops sorry for the confusion, it was in reference to the 135L.

Yeah this is a hard one for me because i feel like unless i sell everything, i wont be able to afford everything.

More than anything, it will be hard to part with the 40d...


Since money is an issue, may I suggest the following: sell the 24-70 / 2.8L and replace it with the Tamron 28-75 / 2.8. I owned both the Tamron and the 24-105L IS on the 5D, and, even money, I'd take the Tamron (but not everyone would). It really is a fantastic lens, though.

So, you could sell the 40D and 24-70 / 2.8L and get a 5D and 28-75 / 2.8. I'd keep the 17-40L, by the way -- you may come to have a new appreciation for wide angle photography with that lens on the 5D.

Of course, you'll not have the reach you had with the 40D. There are many options, but all of them require you to buy another lens, and, the world being how it is, that will cost you more money.

[PhotosGuy]

AND should I really keep my 40d even though is has about 25,000 actuations? What is it that you take the most images of? Are you "going pro"? Do you really think you've squeezed everything out of the 40D that you can? Look at these & rethink the upgrade:

Post your best shots from the "kit lens"-EF-S 18-55 (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=185522)

Post your best shots from Rebel/ XT / XTI (300D/350D/400D) (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=496404)

[aebrown]

What is it that you take the most images of? Are you "going pro"? Do you really think you've squeezed everything out of the 40D that you can? Look at these & rethink the upgrade

I pretty much take pictures of anything and everything, i like to say i do landscapes, but rarely get the chance to go out and do one... anywho, you're right in asking whether i have squeezed everything out of my 40D, because i still find it could have a lot of uses as a back up (that extra reach when i get a telephoto lens, or just something to stick the other lenses on to stop changing back and forth) and it would be good to have both a 1.6 crop and FF.

I wouldn't necessarily say i'm "going pro" because a new camera body isn't going to make me that, but i would say i want to take my photography to the next level. i do want the 5d to really get the most out of my L glass, and get those wider angles at 17mm.

Lastly, I figure someone is going to come up with the question "if you shoot landscapes, why get rid of the 17-40?" and they're brilliant for asking it. I wanted to get rid of it just because on my 40d, i don't use it... if i get a 5d, 100 bucks says i'll keep it.